DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 30-40 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group of inventions and the species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/5/2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 27 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 27 recites the limitation of “wherein for different ones of the plurality of pairs of antennas the transmitting antenna remains the same and the receiving antenna is a different one of the plurality of antennas” which appears to be missing a comma “,” in the underlined section.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 21-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 21 recites the limitation of “measure an electromagnetic property at a second one of the plurality of antennas based on the first signal” which is not clear how the measurement of EM property at second one is based on the first signal. In other words, it is not clear if there is contingency or relation between the first signal and second signal. If there is contingency or relation between the first signal and second signal, it is not clear what that is.
The originally filed specification does not appear to explain these measurements being based on an another one in the most pertinent parts as understood (see e.g., [0019]).
For the purpose of examination, this will be interpreted as measure an electromagnetic property at a second one of the plurality of antennas based on the location of the first signal of the antennas.
Further, claim 21 also recites “the size or location of the object on the substrate is determined based on identification of locations of one or more of the pairs of antennas” which is not clear how or where the object is provided ON THE SUBSTRATE.
Claim 27 recites the limitation of “wherein for different ones of the plurality of pairs of antennas the transmitting antenna remains the same and the receiving antenna is a different one of the plurality of antennas” which is not clear what meant by the claim. In other words, it is not clear what meant by “transmitting antenna remains the same” and “the receiving antenna is a different one of the plurality of antennas”. Further, it is also not clear if one antenna remains the same, does the other one change.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 21, 23-24 and 26-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Persson (US 20100067770).
Regarding claim 21 (as the claim best understood in light of the 35 USC 112 rejections above), Persson teaches a system comprising:
a substrate having a first dimension and a second dimension (see substrate as fabric or bra, and the first and a second dimensions of the fabric or the bra, e.g., in re-produced fig. 2 below and the associated pars; “the antennas are mounted in the fabric of a dedicated bra designed to hold and support the antennas” [0024]; “The antennas could for instance be flexible patch antennas on a substrate that readily can be attached inside, in the fabric or outside the bra” [0025]);
PNG
media_image1.png
290
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
an array of a plurality of antennas coupled to the substrate (e.g., see the antenna array is shown in figs 1 and 2 [reproduced above] as well as the associated pars), a first set of the plurality of antennas extends across the substrate in the first dimension and a second set of the plurality of antennas extends across the substrate in the second dimension (see e.g. antenna [black squares represent the antennas 210] provided in different dimensions), each of the plurality of antennas is spaced apart from one another by a predetermined distance (see e.g., figs 1 and 2 as well as the associated pars); and
a controller configured to determine a size or location of an object located on the substrate (“antenna system is further supported with equipment to conduct and control the measurements and a data processing unit containing computational hardware used for executing the image reconstruction method. The major components of such a system 300 design are shown in FIG. 3, comprising antenna array 310, an RF transceiver module 320, a computer unit” [0025]), wherein for each of a plurality of pairs of antennas in the array of the plurality of antennas, the controller is configured to supply a first signal to a first one of the plurality of antennas (“antenna array is connected to the microwave transceiver module which is transmitting/receiving the electromagnetic radiation to/from the antennas” [0025]) and measure an electromagnetic property at a second one of the plurality of antennas based on the first signal (“At the examination the patient would simply wear the bra while the measurements are made. With this antenna configuration a number of antennas are surrounding the breasts and their exact position and orientation” [0025]), wherein the size or location of the object on the substrate is determined based on identification of locations of one or more of the pairs of antennas where the measured electromagnetic property is greater than a threshold (“advantageous dielectric properties of the breast compared to the properties of malignant tissue at microwave frequencies it has been proposed that microwave imaging” [0009]; “A threshold level is determined in the gradient and all points in space where the gradient value is above the threshold value are assigned the a priori dielectric values. The threshold level is determined such that the cost functional is minimized. In the following iterations the gradients are now used to update the shape, size and location of the object(s).” [0049]; FIG. 4 shows measured permittivity values for healthy breast tissue (bottom) and tumor tissue (middle) [0014], FIG. 5 shows measured conductivity values for healthy breast tissue (bottom) and tumor tissue (middle) [0015]).
Regarding claim 23, Persson teaches wherein the substrate is flexible (“the antennas are mounted in the fabric of a dedicated bra designed to hold and support the antennas” [0024]; “The antennas could for instance be flexible patch antennas on a substrate that readily can be attached inside, in the fabric or outside the bra” [0025]).
Regarding claim 24, Persson teaches wherein the measured electromagnetic property is greater than the threshold when a difference between the measured electromagnetic property and an expected electromagnetic property is greater than a second threshold (“A threshold level is determined in the gradient and all points in space where the gradient value is above the threshold value are assigned the a priori dielectric values. The threshold level is determined such that the cost functional is minimized. In the following iterations the gradients are now used to update the shape, size and location of the object(s)” [0049]; “A line search is made where the location of a threshold level in the gradient is optimized. In that everything that is above the threshold level is associated with the object and everything below is given the background material properties” [0055]).
Regarding claim 26, Persson teaches wherein each of the plurality of pairs of antennas includes a transmitting antenna and a receiving antenna (“antenna array is connected to the microwave transceiver module which is transmitting/receiving the electromagnetic radiation to/from the antennas” [0025]).
Regarding claim 27 (as the claim best understood in light of the 35 USC 112 rejections above), Persson teaches wherein for different ones of the plurality of pairs of antennas the transmitting antenna remains the same and the receiving antenna is a different one of the plurality of antennas (“the microwave radiation used for the imaging is transmitted and after scattering by and inside the tissue under investigation again detected by microwave receivers.” [0022]).
Regarding claim 28, Persson teaches wherein the transmitting antenna is at a first end of the first dimension of the substrate (see figs. 1 and 2 as well as the associated pars.).
Regarding claim 29, Persson teaches wherein the controller is configured to identify a first receiving antenna where the measured electromagnetic property is greater than a threshold (“advantageous dielectric properties of the breast compared to the properties of malignant tissue at microwave frequencies it has been proposed that microwave imaging” [0009]; “A threshold level is determined in the gradient and all points in space where the gradient value is above the threshold value are assigned the a priori dielectric values. The threshold level is determined such that the cost functional is minimized. In the following iterations the gradients are now used to update the shape, size and location of the object(s).” [0049]; FIG. 4 shows measured permittivity values for healthy breast tissue (bottom) and tumor tissue (middle) [0014], FIG. 5 shows measured conductivity values for healthy breast tissue (bottom) and tumor tissue (middle) [0015]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Persson in view of Sime et al (US 20130248226).
Regarding claim 22, Persson teaches all the claimed limitations except for conductive trace.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Sime teaches in FIGS. 1B, 2 and 3A-3C, a set of flexible printed electronics 100 according to an embodiment are depicted. The set of flexible printed electronics 100 generally comprise individual circuit traces each having a substrate 102, a conductive layer 104, a dielectric layer 106, and a comfort layer 108. Of course, any particular embodiment can comprise greater or fewer layers, as the below-described embodiments are for illustration purposes only and are in no way limiting [0034]. Substrate 102 comprises a fabric layer, such as cotton or polyester, woven, or non-woven [0035]
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled in the art before the invention was made to modify the method and/or device of the modified combination of reference(s) as outlined above with conductive trace as taught by Sime because there is a need for a comfort layer that can be prepared on flexible substrates and specifically, flexible printed electronics, that is easily, economically, and efficiently produced, that further does not suffer from memory fold retention problems of the prior art and can thus be easily packaged and used ([0011] of Sime).
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Persson in view of Persson et al (US 20120190977, hereinafter “Persson ‘977”).
Regarding claim 25, Persson teaches all the claimed limitations except for wherein the electromagnetic property is a transmission coefficient or voltage of the first signal.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Persson ‘977 teaches electromagnetic waves at microwave frequencies can penetrate into the human, or animal, body. This property of microwave frequency signals makes it feasible to perform non-invasive measurements in order to detect changes or differences in subjects [0024]. The transmission coefficients which correspond to the sending and receiving of electromagnetic waves with different antennas. The main diagonal section 407 may correspond to the reflection coefficients which are due to the sending and receiving of electromagnetic waves with the same antennas [0034].
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled in the art before the invention was made to modify the method and/or device of the modified combination of reference(s) as outlined above with electromagnetic property is a transmission coefficient as taught by Persson ‘977 because it helps with the difficult analysis tools and methods in order to determine relevant data and obtain relevant results ([0003] of Persson ‘977).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SERKAN AKAR whose telephone number is (571)270-5338. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher Koharski can be reached at 571-272 7230. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SERKAN AKAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797